Another indication that we’re in the process of returning to the ‘normal’ massive increase in firearms sales.
Category: Gun Schtuff
ATF Posts Open Letter on New Definition of Firearm ‘Final Rule’
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)-– On September 27, 2022, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives issued an open letter to all Federal Firearms Licensees. The letter is available online.
The letter is seven pages long and includes several images. The purpose of the letter is explained in the first paragraph. From the atf.gov:
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is issuing this open letter to further assist the firearms industry and the public in understanding whether a “partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional” receiver of an AR-15/M-16 variant weapon has reached a stage of manufacture such that it “may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted” to a functional receiver, and is therefore classified as a “frame or receiver” or “firearm” in accordance with the final rule titled “Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms (Final Rule 2021R-05F), which became effective August 24, 2022. In particular, the following addresses items that are clearly identifiable as an unfinished component part of a weapon—specifically, partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional AR-type receivers (also known as receiver ‘billets’ or ‘blanks’).
The “Final Rule” is being contested in the courts. In North Dakota, Judge Peter D. Welte accepted the ATF definition of a firearm in the Final Rule, at least in his refusal to issue a temporary injunction against the implementation of the rule. The rule might still be found to be unlawful in the court case.
In the Northern District of Texas, Judge Reed O’Conner found the ATF exceeded its authority, and issued a limited injunction against implementation of the rule. From the opinion:
1.The Final Rule exceeds ATF’s statutory authority under the plain language of the Gun Control Act.
The Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to “hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be … in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations.”5 U.S.C. §706(2)(C). Plaintiffs argue the Final Rule exceeds ATF’s statutory authority under the Gun Control Act in two ways. First, Plaintiffs argue that the Final Rule expands ATF’s authority over parts that may be “readily converted” into frames or receivers, when Congress limited ATF’s authority to “frames or receivers” as such. Second, Plaintiffs argue that the Final Rule unlawfully treats weapon parts kits as firearms. Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on both claims.
The letter by ATF explaining the Final Rule does not mention the ongoing court cases. It reiterates ATF’s position that association with tools and jigs, instructions or guides, can make a non-firearm into a firearm.
From page 3 of the letter:
Thus, in order not to be considered “readily” completed to function, ATF has determined that a partially complete AR-type receiver must have no indexing or machining of any kind performed in the area of the trigger/hammer (fire control) cavity. A partially complete AR-type receiver with no indexing or machining of any kind performed in the area of the fire control cavity is not classified as a “receiver,” or “firearm,” if not sold, distributed, or marketed with any associated templates, jigs, molds, equipment, tools, instructions, or guides, such as within a receiver parts kit.
On page 6, the ATF emphasizes that information and tools which make the creation of a frame or receiver easier, are now considered items which make an incomplete part a firearm:
However, the above analysis only applies to partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frames or receivers without any associated templates, jigs, molds, equipment, tools, instructions, guides, or marketing materials. Pursuant to Final Rule 2021R-05F, partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frames or receivers that are sold, distributed, possessed with such items (or made available by the seller or distributor to the same person) may change the analysis, including those distributed as frame or receiver parts kits. 27 CFR 478.12(c). For example, jigs, templates, or instructions can provide the same indexing as if it were placed directly on the unfinished frame or receiver.
At the end of the letter, the ATF adds further warnings about how unfinished frames or receivers are considered “defense articles”, and subject to permits for export or import. From page 7:
Further, although unfinished frames or receivers that do not meet the definition of a “firearm” are not subject to regulation under GCA provisions, they are still considered “defense articles” on the U.S. Munitions Import List and, therefore, require an approved Application and Permit for Importation of Firearms, Ammunition and Implements of War (ATF Form 6) for importation into the United States under 27 CFR 447.41; 447.22, and are also subject to export controls.1
In the old Soviet Union, typewriters had serial numbers and were tightly controlled by the state. Information was tightly controlled. In the United States, the distribution of information is protected by the First Amendment.
The ATF is asserting that tools and information on how to make frames or receivers are, essentially frames and receivers. This is an unprecedented expansion of government control over the private making of firearms, never before existing in the United States.
The injunction by Judge O’Conner
Judge O’Conner sees the major expansion of power by the government. He believes the ATF does not have the authority to do so.
IS GLOCK BUILDING A RIFLE? THE GUNWEBS AGAIN GO WILD
Over the weekend a fracas sparked in Europe over the British army rifle trials has led to a lot of speculation about Glock making a rifle.
While it is no secret that the Brits are looking to pick up an AR-ish rifle to equip their new Ranger units and Special Operations Brigade in lieu of the troubled SA80/L85 Enfield bullpup (I mean, who really likes bullpups, anyway?) Sean Odinson, a former British Army sniper and defense blogger on Saturday released supposed leaked images of a Glock-branded AR platform. This, of course, leaped over the Atlantic and appeared everywhere Glock-related over the weekend.
Dubbed the GR-115F, which probably will end up being the id of the troll who spoofed this whole thing together, the carbine adds fuel to the ongoing fire that Glock is entering the long gun market.
The furniture and BUIS are Magpul while the receivers are a bit more geometrically refined and have ambi surface controls. The barrel length seems to run on the short side and is coupled with a suppressor, which gels with the contract tender that the gun be optimized to run with a suppressor. The handguard uses the same number of M-LOK slots that, as MrGunsNGear says in the below video, is also right on target for the AIWS tender.
In short, he thinks it could be real.
We’ve emailed our contacts over at Glock. Not holding our breath here for a response, but we’ll see.
Federal Court says ATF Overstepped Authority with “Final Rule”
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)-– On September 2, 2022, the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, issued an Opinion and Order granting a preliminary injunction, in part, on the ATF “Final Rule” which radically changed the decades-long definition of what is a firearm in federal law. The opinion explains that ATF created the longstanding definition of what a firearm is in 1978. Now, over forty years later, they are updating and expanding the definition into new areas. From the opinion/order, p. 2-4:
In April 2022, ATF published a Final Rule changing, among other things,the 1978 definition of “frame or receiver.”See Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms, 87 Fed. Reg. 24,652 (Apr. 26, 2022)(codified at 27 C.F.R. pts.447, 478, and 479(2022)).1ATF split the phrase intotwo parts, assigning the term “frame” to handguns and the term “receiver” to any firearm other than a handgun, such as rifles and shotguns. See 27 C.F.R. §478.12(a)(1), (a)(2). ATF then defined the terms “frame” and “receiver” along the same lines as the 1978 rule, though with updated, more precise technical terminology.2 But ATF did not stop there.
Rather than merely updating the terminology,ATF decided to regulate partial frames and receivers. Under the new Final Rule, “[t]he terms ‘frame’and ‘receiver’shall include a partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver, including a frame or receiver parts kit, that is designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver. ”Id.§478.12(c). But “[t]he terms shall not include a forging, casting, printing, extrusion, unmachined body, or similar article that has not yet reached a stage of manufacture where it is clearly identifiable as an unfinished component part of a weapon (e.g., unformed block of metal, liquid polymer, or other raw material).” Id. When determining whether an object is a frame or receiver, the ATF Director is not limited to looking only at the object. “When issuing a classification, the Director may consider any associated templates, jigs, molds, equipment, tools, instructions, guides, or marketing materials that are sold, distributed, or possessed with the item or kit ….” Id.
The Final Rule also amends ATF’s definition of “firearm”to include weapon parts kits.The ATF’s new definition of “firearm,”“shall include a weapon parts kit that is designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive.”Id.§478.11(definition of “firearm”).
The Court found ATF exceeded its authority. From the opinion/order, p. 6:
1. The Final Rule exceeds ATF’s statutory authority under the plain language of the Gun Control Act.
The Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to “hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be … in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations.”5 U.S.C. §706(2)(C). Plaintiffs argue the Final Rule exceeds ATF’s statutory authority under the Gun Control Act in two ways. First, Plaintiffs argue that the Final Rule expands ATF’s authority over parts that may be “readily converted” into frames or receivers, when Congress limited ATF’s authority to “frames or receivers” as such.Second, Plaintiffs argue that the Final Rule unlawfully treats weapon parts kits as firearms.Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on both claims.
On September 23, 2022, Blackhawk Manufacturing Group, doing business as 80 Percent Arms, filed a motion to intervene (to be included in the lawsuit). The motion is under consideration. The court has ordered the ATF to reply by October 7, 2022.
On September 26, 2022, the court denied the government’s motion for clarification, where the ATF wanted to complete a classification of one of the plaintiff’s products. The Court ruled to do so would be in contravention of the injunction it placed in effect on September 2, 2022.
Texas is in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Another Court in Texas refused to issue a preliminary injunction.
In North Dakota, in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Peter D. Welte refused to grant a preliminary injunction in another case challenging the ATF “Final Rule”.
A major contention is the wording of the 1968 Gun Control Act, which clearly differentiates weapons that “may be readily converted” and receivers, which does not include the “may be readily converted” language.
In addition, the inclusion of information, tooling, and jigs as part of what is defined as a firearm is new and a considerable expansion of governmental power.
In Delaware, Judge Maryellen Noreika has ruled the ability to make and possess homemade guns is protected by the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court may eventually take a case on what power, if any, the ATF may legitimately have to regulate the private, non-commercial making of or sale of firearms, and what may be defined as a “firearm”. The court action may take years.
In VanDerStok v Garland, the judge told the ATF that they cannot complete the classification of Tactical Machining LLC's product because that would be implementation of the rule, which the Court already ruled is likely unlawful.
Read the entire order at https://t.co/dM58iIRZxc. pic.twitter.com/3fNQj5i2KE
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) September 28, 2022
I'm not a lawyer or expert so take it with some salt.
— EasternOregonDude (@EasternORdude) September 29, 2022
Well, I read it that way too, so………
New study contradicts “More Guns = More Crime” theory
Do increased gun sales lead to increased crime rates? According to gun control activists, the answer is “yes,” but a new study published in the Journal of Surgical Research finds no connection between firearm purchases and the number of crimes. I’m very pleased that Dr. Mark Hamill, a trauma surgeon and associate professor at the University of Nebraska Medical Center who was a primary author and researcher for the new study, could join me on today’s Cam & Co to discuss his findings and the current state of “gun violence” research in the medical community.
For this particular study, Hamill and his associates used both national and state-level data on crime rates between 1999 and 2015 as well as NICS reporting data over the same time period as a reasonable proxy for gun sales. Hamill hypothesized beforehand that there would be no correlation between gun sales and crime rates, and as it turns out, that’s exactly what researchers found.
Nationally, all crime rates except the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–designated firearm homicides decreased as firearm sales increased over the study period.
Using a naïve national model, increases in firearm sales were associated with significant decreases in multiple crime categories. However, a more robust analysis using generalized estimating equation estimates on state-level data demonstrated increases in firearms sales were not associated with changes in any crime variables examined.
Robust analysis does not identify an association between increased lawful firearm sales and rates of crime or homicide. Based on this, it is unclear if efforts to limit lawful firearm sales would have any effect on rates of crime, homicide, or injuries from violence committed with firearms.
This study follows on previous research released by Hamill and others back in 2019 that examined concealed carry laws and crime rates; looking to see if changes to a state’s concealed carry laws resulted in more crime overall. Just as in this most recent study, the data found no significant association between “shifts from restrictive to nonrestrictive carry legislation on violent crime and public health indicators.”
As Hamill says, the results make sense. Most people who legally purchase and lawfully carry firearms are never going to commit a violent crime, so increasing the number of those who are legally exercising their Second Amendment rights shouldn’t result in more violent crime. As for gun sales and crime rates, while the number of firearms sold might vary from year to year, the number of privately-owned firearms in the United States continues to increase. If more guns equated to more crime, then we’d expect to see a steady rise in criminal offenses year after year. Instead, a graph of violent crime rates going back to 1900 shows that crime tends to ebb and flow in waves that can last for decades.
Note, by the way, what happened to the homicide rate in the years after the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968. While homicide rates had been fairly flat throughout most of the 1960s, there was a sharp increase starting around the time the GCA became law, and a steady decline didn’t begin until more than two decades later in the early 1990s.
That crime decline generally continued until 2020, when shootings and homicides soared in the midst of the COVID-19 shutdowns, disruptions to the criminal justice system, riots, and a pullback from proactive policing strategies. Gun sales also exploded in 2020, but despite the assertions of some gun control activists that the increase in gun purchases must have played a role in the increased violence, there isn’t much evidence that was the case, as even some anti-gun researchers have acknowledged.
Dr. Garen Wintemute of the Violence Prevention Research Program at UC Davis investigated a possible relationship between 2020’s gun sales and the increase in crime and found none.
“Instead, [researchers] concluded that unemployment, economic disparity and physical distancing exacerbated by the pandemic were far more potent predictors of increased violence,” the FiveThirtyEight article notes.
Hamill’s study comes at a time of heightened interest in the gun control debate within the medical community, including a special issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association dedicated to examining “gun violence” and advocating for a host of new gun control laws. Hamill says that unfortunately there does seem to be a bias towards gun control among many researchers, and described how this most recent study was actually rejected by another journal; not because of any issues with the researcher’s methodology, but because the journal’s editor didn’t like the results.
Thankfully this new paper found a home at the Journal of Surgical Research, and I would encourage you to not only read the paper but share its findings far and wide. More guns does not equal more crime, and we’ve got the data to prove it.
Federal District Court grants preliminary injunction on Delaware requiring a serial number on a homemade gun, finding it unconstitutional.
21-1523New World Record Set for Farthest Long-Range Rifle Shot: 4.4 Miles
A team of shooters hit a steel target at 7,744 yards in the Wyoming desert, besting the previous record by several hundred yards
The long-range shooting world record was broken yet again when a team of spotters and a shooter hit a target at 4.4 miles (7,744 yards) in the Wyoming desert earlier this month. The marksmanship feat was orchestrated by Scott Austin and Shepard Humphries, who run Nomad Rifleman, a long-range shooting school out of Jackson Hole, Wyoming.
Together with a group of friends they spent several hours launching bullets downrange before connecting on their 69th shot, according to a release on Nomad Rifleman’s website.
Georgetown professor: AR-15 ‘commonly owned’ and ‘incredibly popular’
In the national debate over banning AR-15-style rifles, there has been a noted lack of information other than anecdotal and heavily biased reports.
On the gun ban side, led by President Joe Biden, the rifle is an “assault weapon” used to kill people. On the gun fan side, led by the National Rifle Association, it’s a tool for hunting and plinking just like every other rifle.
But the truth is, there has been little scholarly study of it and other firearms since 1994, the year the so-called “assault weapon” ban was put into place by President Bill Clinton, which lapsed 10 years later.
Enter political economist and assistant professor William English of Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. Long interested in issues surrounding guns, he just headed a massive survey of nearly 17,000 firearms users to come up with the most detailed portrait of today’s owners, users, and their firearms.
The bottom line from his “National Firearms Survey” is that gun-owning is common, the AR-15 really is the most popular firearm in America, and its club of owners is incredibly diverse.
When he initially proposed a book on guns in America, English found that there was little factual information out there.
“It kind of dawned on me that, yeah, there’s a real opportunity here just as a scholar to contribute to this literature, where I think there’s some gaps and some important questions. It’s certainly not my main focus, but I kind of got sucked into it,” English said.
The survey he headed reached out to over 54,000 and was narrowed down to 16,708 gun owners who coughed up a wealth of information about what they own and what they do with their guns.
For example, English confirmed that 81.4 million own guns, a third of them have used a weapon to defend themselves or their property in 1.6 million incidents per year, and 52% of those who own a gun carry one for self-defense at times.
He found that some 24 million have owned a total of 44 million AR-style rifles and 39 million own extended magazines that hold 10 rounds or more, potentially influential in the political debate over Biden’s call for an AR ban. His survey estimated that there are 542 million extended magazines in the United States, ending any debate that the AR and other semi-automatic firearms are rare and just used by mass killers.
What’s more, English said that ownership of AR-15s is spread out fairly evenly, with a third of white people having one, as well as about a third of black people, Hispanic people, and Asian people.
“These are just incredibly popular firearms,” he said, adding that “they are commonly owned, commonly used.”
Once a pricey weapon, English said there is an interesting sociological, manufacturing, and economic story to be told about the AR-15 and how it started to become popular around 2010, especially with troops returning from the Gulf wars.
“At the end of the day, it is a rifle that I think is very easy to shoot, it’s very easy to control, not a lot of recoil. I could see it also kind of being like an updated .22 for, in terms of plinking, a firearm you can kind of do a little bit of everything with: lightweight, intuitive, but high-performance, accurate, and easy for defense. It certainly has advantages there. So it’s a good gun, and to see it become widely owned, I suppose, makes sense in that context,” said English.
Rare Ghost Gun Found on Michigan Gun Disposal List, But that is Not All
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Michigan law requires police and sheriff departments to turn confiscated firearms over to the state police. The state publishes a list of firearms each month that have not been claimed.
From the michigan.gov website:
The information below identifies firearm(s) confiscated by a Michigan law enforcement agency and turned over to the Michigan State Police (MSP) pursuant to MCL 28.434 and MCL 750.239.
List of Weapons to be Destroyed:
List of weapons to be destroyed October 2022 (public notice date 9-1-2022)(embeded below).
If you are claiming ownership of any firearm(s) listed, please write or call within thirty (30) days of the date of public notice. In addition to your ownership claim, you must be authorized to possess firearms.
If no valid ownership claim is received by MSP within thirty (30) days of the date of public notice, the firearm(s) listed above will be destroyed.
Firearm(s) listed above are not for sale.
The firearms are listed for 30 days so owners can identify them and apply to have them returned.
If no one claims the firearms, they are destroyed. Michigan law does not require they be destroyed. The destruction of firearms has become a wasteful tradition.
Michigan police destroy about half a million dollars worth of firearms yearly for political purposes.
Ahhhhh HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH IIIIIIII Like it!
New Software Negates Latest “Ghost Gun” Rules
A new software program (protected under the First Amendment) is protecting the Second Amendment. The software allows a 3D printer to create a “jig,” a simple but necessary piece of plastic that is used in assembling a firearm at home.
After the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued its latest infringement on the Second Amendment, software developers quickly created open source (free to the world) software to allow owners of 3D printers to print out their own jig. In essence this is an end-run around the latest ATF transgression of precious rights.
The continuing flow of misinformation from the ATF sets up the straw man to justify its latest violation of the Second Amendment:
To help keep guns from being sold to convicted felons and other prohibited purchasers, the rule makes clear that retailers must run background checks before selling kits that contain the parts necessary for someone to readily make a gun.
To help law enforcement trace guns used in a crime, the rule modernizes the definition of frame or receiver, clarifying what must be marked with a serial number – including in easy-to-build firearm kits.
To help reduce the number of unmarked and hard-to-trace “ghost guns,” the rule establishes requirements for federally licensed firearms dealers and gunsmiths to have a serial number added to 3D printed guns or other un-serialized firearms they take into inventory.
It admitted that its latest transgression generated a lot of pushback from gun owners:
On May 7, 2021, the Department of Justice issued a notice of proposed rulemaking, and during the 90-day open comment period, the ATF received more than 290,000 comments, the highest number of comments submitted to a proposed rule in ATF’s history.
Here’s the loophole in the new regulation that software developers are exploiting: if the jig isn’t part of the “kit,” then there’s no firearm under the latest definition and hence no required background check. Specifically, the rule states that when an unfinished frame or receiver is “distributed or possessed with a compatible jig or template,” it is now automatically considered to be a firearm. Leave out the jig, however, and the” kit” is incomplete and doesn’t fall under the rule.
On its website, Tactical Machining in Orlando, Florida, offers this update to its customers:
As many of you know or heard, ATF’s lawless and corrupt ruling went into effect on August 24, 2022. At the advice of our counsel, Tactical Machining was advised to maintain a holding pattern. Since then, we have some developing updates.
Per ATF, 80% AR-15 lowers are still legal!
In recent testimony during lawsuits against the ATF, they have admitted in open court that the “Final rule” does not restrict the sale of 80% lowers IF they are not sold with a jig/instructions or Templates.
Our local ATF agent tasked with enforcing the new rule changes also confirmed, in writing, that all of Tactical Machining’s 80% products are legal to buy and sell since we stopped offering our jigs.
Jim Jusick, Tactical’s design engineer and manager, quoted this from that letter from the ATF:
As we’ve been instructed, and our understanding here in Orlando, the unfinished receiver, with a jig, instructions, or template is NOT A FIREARM.
The combination of such an item (unfinished receiver) with other parts (excluding the jig) does not reach the standard for Readily Convertible.
In other words, your manufacture and selling of unfinished receivers with a lower parts kit [without the jig] does not meet the [newly defined] firearm threshold.
Just as was the case with radar detectors, developers were always one step ahead of the enforcers. In their zeal to criminalize all gun owners and eventually disarm them, the enforcers continue to play catch-up ball with the developers.
This is the second of several student gun range field trip reflection essays from my fall 2022 Sociology of Guns seminar (see reflection #1). The assignment to which students are responding can be found here. I am grateful to these students for their willingness to have their thoughts shared publicly.
By Audrey Dorfman
Prior to the field trip to Veterans Range, I would classify my view of guns in the US as predominantly negative. As I had previously never directly interacted with a gun before, I only associated the use of guns with the violence seen in the media in horrific crimes like mass shootings. I did not understand the need or desire to be a gun owner. However, the experience at the range definitely altered my prior understanding of guns in the US as I surprised myself with my openness and enjoyment of the activity.
When I first arrived at the gun range and gathered with the other students in my group to wait outside the fenced area, I was initially startled by the sound of the AR-15 being fired nearby. Hearing just how loud the gun was made me realize the true power of the weapon I was about to be interacting with. While I was a little bit nervous to handle the guns, I felt mostly excited; I seemed to be the most eager in my group to volunteer to shoot first. I wanted to approach the experience with an open mind, and I think this attitude allowed me to relax and appreciate my time at the range much more.
The part of the field trip that surprised me the most was how much I truly enjoyed it. I walked away feeling a sense of exhilaration and as if I had been relieved of the day’s tension and stress. I immediately contacted my family to tell them how great of a time I had with the different types of guns – however, this unexpected enjoyment also confused me. I was wrestling with the idea of how I could have so much fun with these different guns when they are the same objects I know are used to kill people every single day.
Well, not yet as SCOTUS hasn’t decided to grant cert. But if the current court remains ‘righteous’ as they have to 2nd amendment jurisprudence, they will take the case.
Experts say the Supreme Court may be waiting for additional lower court rulings before wading into the question of whether bump stocks count as machine guns under federal law.
New York is among a half-dozen states that had gun law provisions invalidated by the U.S. Supreme Court that expanded the Second Amendment.
- A Supreme Court case challenging the bump stock ban has been rescheduled for consideration 20 times.
- The Biden administration has urged the high court not to hear the challenge to the Trump-era ban.
- Gun rights groups fear the ban could open the door to other gun regulations.
WASHINGTON – Five years ago, a retired postal worker on the 32nd floor of a Las Vegas hotel carried out the deadliest mass shooting in American history, reopening a debate over a device known as a bump stock that turns a semi-automatic rifle into something closer to a machine gun.
Within a few months then-President Donald Trump moved to ban bump stocks through regulation, asserting the policy would “make it easier for men and women of law enforcement to protect our children and to protect our safety.”
Now two legal challenges to the Trump administration’s prohibition are pending at the Supreme Court – including one that has been rescheduled for consideration 20 times. The lack of a decision about whether or not the court will hear the litigation has led to speculation among experts who follow the issue closely that the court’s 6-3 conservative majority may not agree on how to proceed.
“The six conservatives on the court right now aren’t really on the same page about guns as much as people think they are,” said Dru Stevenson, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. Some in the court’s conservative wing, he said, “might be afraid to take the case if they’re not sure that they’re going to get their way.”
In addition to once again raising the issue of guns at the nation’s highest court months after it decided a landmark Second Amendment case, the new litigation also delves into how much power federal agencies have to create regulations when the law those rules are based on is unclear. Conservatives for years have sought to limit that agency discretion and their arguments seem to be gaining traction with the high court.
One of the cases, W. Clark Aposhian v. Attorney General Merrick Garland, was filed a year ago by a gun lobbyist in Utah who purchased a bump stock before the prohibition took effect. Another, Gun Owners of America v. Garland, was filed in March by gun rights groups. The court scheduled both cases for its final conference of the previous term in June, when the justices meet to discuss which cases to hear. Both were rescheduled.
The justices will hold their first post-summer conference on Sept. 28 and both cases are scheduled to be discussed at that meeting.
In a major guns decision in June, the Supreme Court ruled that a New York law that made it harder for state residents to carry handguns in public violated the Second Amendment. The 6-3 majority in that decision also embraced a new legal standard that puts a greater emphasis on historic gun regulations and may make it far harder for gun control advocates to defend gun laws.
Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts joined the majority, but they wrote separately to stress some gun prohibitions may be permissible.
But the legal fight over bump stocks, a device that uses the recoil of a semi-automatic firearm to mimic automatic firing, isn’t being fought squarely on Second Amendment grounds. Rather, the groups and individuals challenging the ban say Trump’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives erred when it interpreted a 1986 ban on the sale of machine guns to also include bump stock devices.
The 1986 law defines a machine gun as a weapon that fires more than one shot automatically “by a single function of the trigger.” Such weapons have been heavily regulated since the 1930s because of their use by organized crime leaders such as Al Capone.
Gun rights groups note the ATF had previously determined that bump stocks did not amount to machine guns. They point to remarks by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who said in 2018 that “if ATF tries to ban these devices after admitting repeatedly that it lacks the authority to do so, that process could be tied up in court for years.” The best way to ban the accessories, Feinstein said at the time, was through legislation.
Aidan Johnston, federal affairs director for Gun Owners of America, dismissed the idea that the accessories are as potent a tool as critics suggest. For one thing, Johnston said, semi-automatic weapons can be “bump fired” through less sophisticated – and impossible to regulate – means, such as by threading a trigger finger into a belt loop on a pair of pants. For another, he said, bump firing makes it hard for the shooter to hit a target.
“It’s completely useless for self-defense, home defense – anything like that,” said Johnston, who said he owned one of the devices before the ATF rule went into effect.
So why fight it? Partly it’s because the plaintiffs fear what regulations may follow if federal courts permit agencies to prohibit bump stocks.
“We have to fight back if the federal government is going to say that any weapon that can be bump fired is a machine gun,” Johnston said. “If you allow that definition to stand then you’re only one rule change away from someone saying every semi-automatic firearm is a machine gun and banning those, too.”
That’s not a far-fetched idea. Stevenson said that another possible reason why the Supreme Court hasn’t decided what to do with the bump stock cases is that some of the justices may want to see how lower federal courts rule on challenges to semi-automatic weapon bans. After the decision in the New York case in June, the high court sent several other Second Amendment challenges back to lower courts for further review. One of those was a lawsuit challenging Maryland’s ban on the AR-15 and other semi-automatic rifles with magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds.
Gun control advocates push back on the argument that bump stocks should be permitted just because gun enthusiasts can jerry-rig an alternative.
“Just because a rule doesn’t completely solve a problem doesn’t mean it’s not a legitimate rule,” said Shira Feldman, litigation counsel with Brady, a gun control group. “There seems to be a lot of interest in circumventing what is a ban on machines – to find some way to use guns that are not supposed to be machine guns as machine guns.”
It’s not clear how many of the devices are in circulation, though the Justice Department had previously pegged the number between 280,000 and 520,000.
Feldman points to another reason why the Supreme Court may have been slow to take up the issue of bump stocks: So far, gun rights groups have been losing in appeals courts. The justices often like to see a disagreement in circuit courts – known as a “circuit split” – before wading in to resolve a dispute and provide guidance to lower courts on a thorny legal question.
“Right now,” Feldman said, “there is no circuit split.”
But that may soon change. In a separate case, the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has scheduled arguments in a challenge to the bump stock ban for Tuesday. Meanwhile, at least one of the justices has signaled a receptivity to the arguments being made by the gun rights groups.
The ATF, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in 2020, “used to tell everyone that bump stocks don’t qualify as ‘machineguns.’ Now it says the opposite. The law hasn’t changed, only an agency’s interpretation of it.
“Why should courts,” Gorsuch asked, “defer to such bureaucratic pirouetting?”
Tactical gear for women to carry arms
Vicky Johnston, the owner and designer of Her Tactical, joined the show today to talk about her business.
Johnston encourages women to be prepared, be aware, and be ready for anything they may encounter. She shares her self defense skills with others through her company, offering a workshop to help build confidence.
Johnston tells of her story finding items to conceal a gun that work well for women. In her experience, every store she went to only had products for men, so she started her own company specifically tailored for women.
Her Tactical is putting on a workshop in February, and is offering a 15% discount on any concealed carry product purchased using the coupon code “ABC4” on her website.
Concealed Carry Products: https://hertactical.com/
Workshop Registration: https://hertactical.com/workshop/
CIMARRON CARTRIDGE CONVERSIONS
REPLICAS OF OUR FIRST CARTRIDGE GUNS
ARE BETTER THAN THE ORIGINALS.
WRITTEN BY JOHN TAFFIN
Cimarron’s .45 Colt Remington Cartridge Conversion (bottom) is similar to one of the first ever big-bore cartridge conversions. A replica 1858 percussion .44 revolver is above it.
An original Richards Conversion in .44 Colt (top) compared to the .45 Colt Cimarron Richards II.
The Cimarron version has a lightly larger cylinder to accommodate the .45 Colt cartridge.
One of the great passions of my life, handguns, go back more than 500 years. Even though the idea of the cartridge is nearly 200-years old, powder, ball and cap were state-of-the-art for most of the 19th century. A Frenchman patented the idea in 1812. Another Frenchman came up with the pinfire cartridge in 1846 and Flobert exhibited a rimfire cartridge at the London Exhibition in 1851. Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, Smith & Wesson received a patent for a centerfire metallic cartridge in 1854 and then around 1856 developed the first true rimfire cartridge as it is known today.
37 Months Straight: America Is Buying 1 Million Guns A Month
While they might not be the super records of years past, guns and overall firearms sales are still going through the roof.
According to newly released FBI data, background checks exceeded 2.51 million in August, which was consistent with the previous two summers. However, Small Arms Analytics & Forecasting (SAAF) estimates August 2022 U.S. firearms unit sales were at about 1.4 million units, a year-over-year decrease of 3.8 percent relative to August 2021. The decrease affected the handgun segment (−2.7 percent) significantly less than it did the long-gun segment (−7.2 percent). SAAF’s firearms unit sales estimates and forecasts are based on raw data taken from the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), adjusted for checks unlikely to be related to end-user firearms sales.
“Normally August sales are ‘bumped up’ relative to July sales by about 10% to 30%, but this has not been the case for the past three years, possibly reflecting different purchasing patterns since covid-19 arrived in the U.S,” said SAAF Chief Economist Jurgen Brauer.
Even with the decline, however, August 2022 was the 37th consecutive month topping more than one million civilian firearms sold – and by a considerable margin.
Strong Second Amendment Support: A Reason for Guns Sales Boom?
Strong firearms sales suggest continued support for the Second Amendment, even as there have been – or more likely in reaction to the – continued calls from lawmakers for additional gun control measures. Earlier this summer, the United States House and Senate passed a bipartisan gun-reform bill, which President Joe Biden subsequently signed into law. That $13 billion measure had been designed to toughen background checks for the youngest gun buyers, keep firearms from more domestic violence offenders, and also to help states put in place red flag laws that make it easier for authorities to take weapons from people who are thought to be “dangerous.”
Opponents of the law have suggested it unfairly punishes law-abiding citizens while doing little to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
“August’s figures show there is a clear and steady desire by the American public for lawful firearm ownership,” the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the firearms industry trade association said via a statement, reported by Newsmax.
“Consistently throughout the year, background check figures for firearm sales at retail have put 2022 on pace to be the third strongest year, behind only the outsized years witnessed in 2020 and 2021. August’s figures of 1,286,816 background checks was slightly ahead of July’s that came in at 1,233,115,” the NSSF statement continued.
“This also marks 37 months straight of background checks exceeding 1 million. Americans are choosing their gun rights by the millions each month while gun control politicians talk only of efforts to deprive them of their Constitutional rights. They are voting with their wallets. Politicians would be wise to heed to the will of Americans lawfully exercising their Constitutional rights and instead focus their efforts on locking up criminals that misuse firearms,” the NSSF said.
Guns Sales Keep Booming, Gun Companies on the Move
This year has also seen many firearms manufacturers pulling up stakes to move out of the “blue states” – especially those with strict gun control measures such as Massachusetts and Connecticut – to more pro-friendly “red states.”
Earlier this year, Smith & Wesson has moved its headquarters from Springfield, Mass. – once the center of “Gun Valley” since the American Revolution – to Tennessee, while at least 20 other firearms, ammunition, and gun accessory companies have also made similar moves. Beretta USA has actually led the efforts, as it moved its production to Tennessee in 2014, relocating some 200 jobs from Maryland.
In addition, just last year, Oklahoma lawmakers even launched a study to determine how to attract gun makers best, while governors from six states attended this year’s SHOT Show (Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade Show), the industry’s annual trade event held each January in Las Vegas. The six governors made the trek to promote their states to the industry.
“These states are openly attracting the industry. Some of them have been very aggressive,” Mark Oliva, spokesman for the NSSF, told The Washington Post.
Though President Biden and some lawmakers may still believe that Americans are clamoring for “gun control,” the sales data tells another tale.
Han Solo Blaster from Star Wars Total Realized at Auction $1,057,500